Agenda item

To provide an update on how the Council is performing for the period 1 July 2024 to 30 September 2024 (report of the Assistant Director – Corporate enclosed).

Consideration was given to the report of the Assistant Director – Corporate which provided an update on how the Council is performing for the period 1 July 2024 to 30 September 2024.

The Assistant Director – Strategic Growth and Development introduced the report on behalf of the report author, the Business Intelligence and Change Manager who had sent apologies, and the following points were highlighted:

• 72% of the Council’s performance metrics presented on or above target;
• 11% were slightly below target;
• 11% were significantly under target;

Areas of strong performance included:

• Planning Applications: where a high performance was achieved in the determination of major (91.12%) and minor (87.04%) planning applications within set timeframes;
• Safety Checks: 100% compliance regarding gas safety checks, fire risk assessments, asbestos management surveys and legionella risk assessments;
• Waste Collection: 99.89% of waste collections were successful on the first attempt; and
• Freedom of Information rates: whilst slightly under target, performance had showed a significant improvement and was at its highest levels for two years.

Areas which required improvement:

• Homelessness Prevention: 39.53% of cases were successfully opened while customers remained in settled accommodation, against a 50% target;
• Customer Contact Centre average answer rate was 85.42% against a target of 90%. Efforts were being made to improve performance utilising call routing messages and a social media campaign; and
• Revenues and Benefits answer rate: 77.15% against a target of 87%. Improvement efforts were in hand, which included call routing messages and training.

The Homelessness Reduction and Housing Solution Manager provided the panel with a presentation (appended to the minutes) and a verbal update in respect of homelessness prevention performance which included the following:  

·       The team was not considered to be under-resourced and officers endeavoured to work closely with professional bodies to deal with cases at the earlier ‘prevention’ stage, nonetheless, rough sleepers, sofa surfers, and those fleeing domestic abuse were required to be accepted in ‘relief’ for a period of assessment;

·       Professional bodies, such as the prison service and NHS, had referred 17 (of 52) cases, which were bound to be accepted in the relief duty.

·       A social media campaign had conveyed the process to be followed when a homelessness case was presented to the council in order to encourage customers to make an approach as soon as possible;

·       Where a local connection to South Holland could not be ascertained, cases would be referred either to the local authority associated with the customers last place of residence or social services where a safeguarding referral was required;

·       The conditions for the application of relief duty were relayed; and

·       SHDC’s Q2 prevention duty performance at 46.2% exceeded the national average of 40.9%.

Members considered the update from the Homelessness Reduction and Housing Solution Manager and made the following comments:

·       Members queried how the ‘percentage of homeless cases that were successfully resolved before a customer became homeless’ could be above 100%.

o   The Homelessness Reduction and Housing Solution Manager confirmed that where prevention cases were extended into another quarter, performance statistics could overlap and therefore provided a performance above 100%.

.

·       Members queried whether priority referrals to housing associations were undertaken to alleviate increased pressure points?

o   The Homelessness Reduction and Housing Solution Manager responded that:

§  The housing register was utilised as a tool to help house customers into settled accommodation which included nominations to Housing Associations;

§  Housing Associations had an element of autonomy regarding their own waiting lists. Involvement from the council may be required where a customer was threatened with homelessness, for example due to rent arrears;

§  When a customer approached the council in a relief period, a ‘priority need assessment’ was undertaken which could result in the utilisation of council owned temporary accommodation or the temporary utilisation of nightly paid facilities in the district;

§  There had been a 14% increase in homelessness nationally and an increase above the seasonal trend had been seen in South Holland;

§  Regarding mitigations in place:

·       A prevention plan of action had been created which aimed to ensure that partners, including private landlords, referred customers to the council at the earliest stage;

·       A communications campaign had taken place in August 2024 to highlight the service provided by the council;

·       Where homelessness / potential homelessness cases were identified, members were encouraged to relay the contact details of homelessness team for support as soon as possible; and

·       Following a member request, the process and homelessness team contacts would be relayed to parish council clerks.

• Members noted prevailing high rents within the private sector and asked whether the council covered initial deposits to support customers into private sector properties.
  • The Homelessness Reduction and Housing Solution Manager responded that the team held a homelessness prevention grant which was utilised and assessed on a case-by-case basis to support customers with deposits and advance rent.

• Members queried the number of rough sleepers within the district.
  • The Homelessness Reduction and Housing Solution Manager responded that:
    • The annual rough sleeper count had recently been undertaken and this had increased to 24;
    • Attempts were being made to address the issue by relaying options of settled accommodation to those involved, such as offers into the private rental sector and social/supported housing; and
    • The availability of properties was the main resource challenges.

Members made the following comments regarding the performance of other areas within the report: 

·       Members highlighted an issue with the ‘percentage of recycling collected that is unable to be recycled’ and requested that, should assurance regarding improvements to performance not be available, that an update regarding the reasons for the underperformance come forward at the next meeting.

o   The issue would be referred to the report author for a response after the meeting.

·       Members welcomed the increase in performance in respect of the ‘percentage of corporate complaints responded to within corporately set timescales’ and queried the reason for the improvement and whether this was sustainable.

o   The issue would be referred to the report author for a response after the meeting.

·       Members noted that the ‘business rate collection rate’ was low for Q1 2024/25. Whilst the Q1 2023/2024 data was not included within the report, it was accepted that the collection rates for the other quarters were comparable with those of the previous year.

·       Members referred to the underperformance relating to ‘Customer Contact average answer rate’ and queried the reasons for the high customer abandonment rate. Members were keen to understand whether the waiting time period data for a routed call commenced at the initial auto-answer stage or when the call was diverted to a service area. More information was required to understand the issue.

o   The issue would be referred to the report author for a response after the meeting.

·       Members stated that the council run stall occupancy level (markets) was disappointing.

·       Members welcomed the increase in swimming lessons when comparing 2023/2024 Q2 data with that of 2024/2025, however a decrease in visitor numbers for the Castle Sports Complex was noted.

o   The Assistant Director – Leisure and Culture stated that visitor numbers would recover upon completion of the new facility.

• Members referred to the performance relating to the ‘Kingdom Contract, number of fixed penalty notices (FPN) issued’ and queried the reason for the low number of FPNs issued for Q1 2024/25.
  • The issue would be referred to the report author for a response after the meeting

• Members queried the increased number of ‘stage one complaints received per 1000 homes’ between Q1 and Q2 2024/25.
  • The Business Support Manager responded that the data was cumulative rather than distinct to each quarter. For future clarity, the presented data would be amended to enable quarterly comparisons to be made.

AGREED:

That the contents of the report be noted.